Enhancing Reverse Engineering: Investigating and Benchmarking Large Language Models for Vulnerability Analysis in Decompiled Binaries

Security experts reverse engineer (decompile) binary code to identify critical security vulnerabilities. The limited access to source code in vital systems - such as firmware, drivers, and proprietary software used in Critical Infrastructures (CI) - makes this analysis even more crucial on the binary level. Even with available source code, a semantic gap persists after compilation between the source and the binary code executed by the processor. This gap may hinder the detection of vulnerabilities in source code. That being said, current research on Large Language Models (LLMs) overlooks the significance of decompiled binaries in this area by focusing solely on source code. In this work, we are the first to empirically uncover the substantial semantic limitations of state-of-the-art LLMs when it comes to analyzing vulnerabilities in decompiled binaries, largely due to the absence of relevant datasets. To bridge the gap, we introduce DeBinVul, a novel decompiled binary code vulnerability dataset. Our dataset is multi-architecture and multi-optimization, focusing on C/C++ due to their wide usage in CI and association with numerous vulnerabilities. Specifically, we curate 150,872 samples of vulnerable and non-vulnerable decompiled binary code for the task of (i) identifying; (ii) classifying; (iii) describing vulnerabilities; and (iv) recovering function names in the domain of decompiled binaries. Subsequently, we fine-tune state-of-the-art LLMs using DeBinVul and report on a performance increase of 19%, 24%, and 21% in the capabilities of CodeLlama, Llama3, and CodeGen2 respectively, in detecting binary code vulnerabilities. Additionally, using DeBinVul, we report a high performance of 80-90% on the vulnerability classification task. Furthermore, we report improved performance in function name recovery and vulnerability description tasks.

Jailbreaking Large Language Models with Symbolic Mathematics

Recent advancements in AI safety have led to increased efforts in training and red-teaming large language models (LLMs) to mitigate unsafe content generation. However, these safety mechanisms may not be comprehensive, leaving potential vulnerabilities unexplored. This paper introduces MathPrompt, a novel jailbreaking technique that exploits LLMs' advanced capabilities in symbolic mathematics to bypass their safety mechanisms. By encoding harmful natural language prompts into mathematical problems, we demonstrate a critical vulnerability in current AI safety measures. Our experiments across 13 state-of-the-art LLMs reveal an average attack success rate of 73.6\%, highlighting the inability of existing safety training mechanisms to generalize to mathematically encoded inputs. Analysis of embedding vectors shows a substantial semantic shift between original and encoded prompts, helping explain the attack's success. This work emphasizes the importance of a holistic approach to AI safety, calling for expanded red-teaming efforts to develop robust safeguards across all potential input types and their associated risks.

Improving LLM Reasoning with Multi-Agent Tree-of-Thought Validator Agent

Multi-agent strategies have emerged as a promising approach to enhance the reasoning abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) by assigning specialized roles in the problem-solving process. Concurrently, Tree of Thoughts (ToT) methods have shown potential in improving reasoning for complex question-answering tasks by exploring diverse reasoning paths. A critical limitation in multi-agent reasoning is the 'Reasoner' agent's shallow exploration of reasoning paths. While ToT strategies could help mitigate this problem, they may generate flawed reasoning branches, which could harm the trustworthiness of the final answer. To leverage the strengths of both multi-agent reasoning and ToT strategies, we introduce a novel approach combining ToT-based Reasoner agents with a Thought Validator agent. Multiple Reasoner agents operate in parallel, employing ToT to explore diverse reasoning paths. The Thought Validator then scrutinizes these paths, considering a Reasoner's conclusion only if its reasoning is valid. This method enables a more robust voting strategy by discarding faulty reasoning paths, enhancing the system's ability to tackle tasks requiring systematic and trustworthy reasoning. Our method demonstrates superior performance compared to existing techniques when evaluated on the GSM8K dataset, outperforming the standard ToT strategy by an average 5.6\% across four LLMs.

AutoSafeCoder: A Multi-Agent Framework for Securing LLM Code Generation through Static Analysis and Fuzz Testing

Recent advancements in automatic code generation using large language models (LLMs) have brought us closer to fully automated secure software development. However, existing approaches often rely on a single agent for code generation, which struggles to produce secure, vulnerability-free code. Traditional program synthesis with LLMs has primarily focused on functional correctness, often neglecting critical dynamic security implications that happen during runtime. To address these challenges, we propose AutoSafeCoder, a multi-agent framework that leverages LLM-driven agents for code generation, vulnerability analysis, and security enhancement through continuous collaboration. The framework consists of three agents: a Coding Agent responsible for code generation, a Static Analyzer Agent identifying vulnerabilities, and a Fuzzing Agent performing dynamic testing using a mutation-based fuzzing approach to detect runtime errors. Our contribution focuses on ensuring the safety of multi-agent code generation by integrating dynamic and static testing in an iterative process during code generation by LLM that improves security. Experiments using the SecurityEval dataset demonstrate a 13% reduction in code vulnerabilities compared to baseline LLMs, with no compromise in functionality.

Enhancing Source Code Security with LLMs: Demystifying The Challenges and Generating Reliable Repairs

With the recent unprecedented advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) computing, progress in Large Language Models (LLMs) is accelerating rapidly, presenting challenges in establishing clear guidelines, particularly in the field of security. That being said, we thoroughly identify and describe three main technical challenges in the security and software engineering literature that spans the entire LLM workflow, namely; \textbf{\textit{(i)}} Data Collection and Labeling; \textbf{\textit{(ii)}} System Design and Learning; and \textbf{\textit{(iii)}} Performance Evaluation. Building upon these challenges, this paper introduces \texttt{SecRepair}, an instruction-based LLM system designed to reliably \textit{identify}, \textit{describe}, and automatically \textit{repair} vulnerable source code. Our system is accompanied by a list of actionable guides on \textbf{\textit{(i)}} Data Preparation and Augmentation Techniques; \textbf{\textit{(ii)}} Selecting and Adapting state-of-the-art LLM Models; \textbf{\textit{(iii)}} Evaluation Procedures. \texttt{SecRepair} uses a reinforcement learning-based fine-tuning with a semantic reward that caters to the functionality and security aspects of the generated code. Our empirical analysis shows that \texttt{SecRepair} achieves a \textit{12}\% improvement in security code repair compared to other LLMs when trained using reinforcement learning. Furthermore, we demonstrate the capabilities of \texttt{SecRepair} in generating reliable, functional, and compilable security code repairs against real-world test cases using automated evaluation metrics.

Unintentional Security Flaws in Code: Automated Defense via Root Cause Analysis

Software security remains a critical concern, particularly as junior developers, often lacking comprehensive knowledge of security practices, contribute to codebases. While there are tools to help developers proactively write secure code, their actual effectiveness in helping developers fix their vulnerable code remains largely unmeasured. Moreover, these approaches typically focus on classifying and localizing vulnerabilities without highlighting the specific code segments that are the root cause of the issues, a crucial aspect for developers seeking to fix their vulnerable code. To address these challenges, we conducted a comprehensive study evaluating the efficacy of existing methods in helping junior developers secure their code. Our findings across five types of security vulnerabilities revealed that current tools enabled developers to secure only 36.2\% of vulnerable code. Questionnaire results from these participants further indicated that not knowing the code that was the root cause of the vulnerability was one of their primary challenges in repairing the vulnerable code. Informed by these insights, we developed an automated vulnerability root cause (RC) toolkit called T5-RCGCN, that combines T5 language model embeddings with a graph convolutional network (GCN) for vulnerability classification and localization. Additionally, we integrated DeepLiftSHAP to identify the code segments that were the root cause of the vulnerability. We tested T5-RCGCN with 56 junior developers across three datasets, showing a 28.9\% improvement in code security compared to previous methods. Developers using the tool also gained a deeper understanding of vulnerability root causes, resulting in a 17.0\% improvement in their ability to secure code independently. These results demonstrate the tool's potential for both immediate security enhancement and long-term developer skill growth.

Enhancing Event Reasoning in Large Language Models through Instruction Fine-Tuning with Semantic Causal Graphs

Event detection and text reasoning have become critical applications across various domains. While LLMs have recently demonstrated impressive progress in reasoning abilities, they often struggle with event detection, particularly due to the absence of training methods that consider causal relationships between event triggers and types. To address this challenge, we propose a novel approach for instruction fine-tuning LLMs for event detection. Our method introduces Semantic Causal Graphs (SCGs) to capture both causal relationships and contextual information within text. Building off of SCGs, we propose SCG Instructions for fine-tuning LLMs by focusing on event triggers and their relationships to event types, and employ Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) to help preserve the general reasoning abilities of LLMs. Our evaluations demonstrate that training LLMs with SCG Instructions outperforms standard instruction fine-tuning by an average of 35.69\% on Event Trigger Classification. Notably, our fine-tuned Mistral 7B model also outperforms GPT-4 on key event detection metrics by an average of 31.01\% on Event Trigger Identification, 37.40\% on Event Trigger Classification, and 16.43\% on Event Classification. We analyze the retention of general capabilities, observing only a minimal average drop of 2.03 points across six benchmarks. This comprehensive study investigates multiple LLMs for the event detection task across various datasets, prompting strategies, and training approaches.

Can Reinforcement Learning Unlock the Hidden Dangers in Aligned Large Language Models?

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language tasks, but their safety and morality remain contentious due to their training on internet text corpora. To address these concerns, alignment techniques have been developed to improve the public usability and safety of LLMs. Yet, the potential for generating harmful content through these models seems to persist. This paper explores the concept of jailbreaking LLMs-reversing their alignment through adversarial triggers. Previous methods, such as soft embedding prompts, manually crafted prompts, and gradient-based automatic prompts, have had limited success on black-box models due to their requirements for model access and for producing a low variety of manually crafted prompts, making them susceptible to being blocked. This paper introduces a novel approach using reinforcement learning to optimize adversarial triggers, requiring only inference API access to the target model and a small surrogate model. Our method, which leverages a BERTScore-based reward function, enhances the transferability and effectiveness of adversarial triggers on new black-box models. We demonstrate that this approach improves the performance of adversarial triggers on a previously untested language model.

Estimating Earthquake Magnitude in Sentinel-1 Imagery via Ranking

Earthquakes are commonly estimated using physical seismic stations, however, due to the installation requirements and costs of these stations, global coverage quickly becomes impractical. An efficient and lower-cost alternative is to develop machine learning models to globally monitor earth observation data to pinpoint regions impacted by these natural disasters. However, due to the small amount of historically recorded earthquakes, this becomes a low-data regime problem requiring algorithmic improvements to achieve peak performance when learning to regress earthquake magnitude. In this paper, we propose to pose the estimation of earthquake magnitudes as a metric-learning problem, training models to not only estimate earthquake magnitude from Sentinel-1 satellite imagery but to additionally rank pairwise samples. Our experiments show at max a 30%+ improvement in MAE over prior regression-only based methods, particularly transformer-based architectures.

On the Consistency of Fairness Measurement Methods for Regression Tasks

With growing applications of Machine Learning (ML) techniques in the real world, it is highly important to ensure that these models work in an equitable manner. One main step in ensuring fairness is to effectively measure fairness, and to this end, various metrics have been proposed in the past literature. While the computation of those metrics are straightforward in the classification set-up, it is computationally intractable in the regression domain. To address the challenge of computational intractability, past literature proposed various methods to approximate such metrics. However, they did not verify the extent to which the output of such approximation algorithms are consistent with each other. To fill this gap, this paper comprehensively studies the consistency of the output of various fairness measurement methods through conducting an extensive set of experiments on various regression tasks. As a result, it finds that while some fairness measurement approaches show strong consistency across various regression tasks, certain methods show a relatively poor consistency in certain regression tasks. This, in turn, calls for a more principled approach for measuring fairness in the regression domain.